• Print
  • Contracts accounts for 155 out of 812 casebriefs.

Style of causeRatio

Williams v Roffey Bros. and Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1991] 1 QB 1

An abandonment of the contract by consensus of both parties can constitute good consideration for a subsequent contract where:
**The party promising to increase the payment offered receives a practical benefit, AND
**There is no economic duress or fraud on the part of the receiver of the payment

Williams v. Carwardine, [1833] EWHC KB J44.

There can be a contract with any person who performed the necessary condition(s) in a advertisement.

All that was necessary to fulfill the contract was that she knew of the reward before giving the information (even if her only motive to give the information was for the reward).

With v O'Flanagan [1936] Ch 575

Silence about a change of circumstances can amount to a misrepresentation.

Wood v. Lucy, Lady Duff-Gordon, 222 N.Y. 88, 118 N.E. 214 (1917)

Where there is an obligation (on both parties) under a contract that is considered valid consideration

Wroth v Tyler [1974] Ch 30; [1973] 1 All ER 897

If damages are awarded in substitution for specific performance, the court should award such damages as will put the plaintiff into as good as position as if the contract had been performed, even if to do so means awarding damages assessed by reference to a period subsequent to the date of breach.

Contemplation of parties in Hadley v Baxendale only applies to type or head of damages contemplated by parties – it does not affect the quantum of damages under a specific type or head of damages (if parties contemplated the type of damage, it does not matter if they did not think the amount of damages would be so high – the breaching party is still liable)